But it is considered rape if a woman has consensual sex while intoxicated. So how is that fair? And, considering women have no regard for how the way they dress/present themselves as highly sexual beings affects the men around them, I'd be wary of claiming they have zero fault in the matter.

I think if a person says they would rape because the woman is dressed in a provocative manner is an indictment on the rapist not the victim. Not very long ago, people went around with the barest clothing and there are no recorded incidences of rape. A rapist will be a rapist whether the victim is in jeans pants, walking naked, or wearing a sari!

Alan black, have you considered going into the priesthood or a career on Faux Fox News, perhaps politics in America. What is your view on all those prison rapes Alan, do you think they happen because orange jump overalls make the butts of male inmates just look soooooooooo sexy - doubtless the inmates only have the,selves to blame there as well ?

Could someone being intoxicated lead them to be raped? Yes, if it made them more vulnerable to an attack. Could dressing provocatively? I suppose greater attention might be drawn, thus leading to attack, but from what I've read a lot of sexual predators seek out victims anyway. Recklessness is possible, depending on what it was. Does any of this mean that if the person victimized were intoxicated, dressed provocatively, behaved recklessly, etc. they were to blame? No. Does it diminish the guilty of their attacker? No. Does this poster express more than a tautology? Also no. By way of analogy, it does not help prevent murder by saying "People are murdered because murderers murder." One does not have to blame the murder victim for their to be proposals that may diminish their chance of being murdered. Nor is their murderer any the less to blame if they are murdered.

I don't accept that a 'victim' must always be 0% to blame for the actions of the perpetrator. For instance, if I walked into a crowd of violent and protesting muslims with a sign that shows Mo with a bomb on his turbin and I get injured or killed - Who in their right minds would say that I was 0% to blame for the actions of the muslims. Of course I was also to blame. The fact of the matter is the muslims had an intolerance for that sort of a depiction of Mo and I knew well enough I was putting myself in danger.

To say that I was killed or injured because someone killed me or injured me - to me - sounds ludicrous.

Also I know this isn't at all the circumstance that most rapes occur in - such as a woman sexually flaunting herself in front of a man that she isn't familiar with and doesn't know his history or his personality and then claiming 'I've been raped' - But I can't for the life of me see how each and every time the 'victim' of the rape can be claimed to be 0% at fault for it.

"Were your actions advisable in that hypothetical scenario? No, but that doesn't create justification for the violent response."

I completely agree with this statement. It definitely doesn't create justification for the violent response but to me that is different than saying one is blameless of their own actions of which may not be advisable.

I suppose I am a bit pessimistic in my view of humanity and specifically males. Some people claim 'Oh how dare you assume men do not have the intelligence or willpower to control their own desires to rape a woman if only we taught them the women are real people too and they deserve respect'

To which I reply, 'Yeah but you're assuming these men actually give a shit about the feelings of someone else' and more so I believe part of the desire to rape is precisely to put someone in a position of which they have no control.

I really don't think some men have the control that is needed. And if they can't control themselves then would they seek professional help? Probably not because who would want to go to a doctor and claim that they rape women for pleasure? Most likely not many men do this...